Debate on Germany: 'a mix of communism, LGBT and Islam'

Germany's new government mixes communism, LGBT and Sarracin, say forum users

There is a touch of paradox to the scene. A country that prides itself on precision social engineering has, according to a post circulating on a forum, given itself an Executive where three blocs coexist that, on paper, despise each other: the post-communist left, the institutionalized LGBT lobby and a growing electoral base of Muslim origin. The result, as of this discussion, is a political contraption many see as unstable by design. The thesis running through the whole thing is simple: the harder you force the mix, the sooner it breaks.

The dominant diagnosis does not dispute the demographic data, it disputes the logic. The argument is that Sarracin and the LGBT movement are antagonistic by nature and that trying to fit them into the same government program is an exercise in wishful thinking. The official defense of Sarracin by sectors of the LGBT movement baffles even those who would never vote for the right.

What the new German government stands for

The package attributed to the new Executive combines three pillars: classic socialist policy, an LGBT agenda and the management of mass immigration. For part of the analysis, these are not three separate things but one: a machine for dividing society into rival minorities so that the whole becomes weaker and easier to govern.

Some put it bluntly: dividing people into minorities, however opposed to one another, leaves the hardcore base demoralized and turned into a mistreated majority until it stops being a majority. That is the cynical reading of the matter, and it is not the only one.

The demographic math nobody disputes

The numbers circulating in the analysis are no mystery. The talk is of a **25% of the population of immigrant origin** that tends to vote for pogre options, and of half the population, women, who also vote in that direction. With those two levers, the room of the patriotic voter is compressed, however numerous he may be.

The logical consequence, according to this current of thought, is that the country is governed by a coalition that does not represent the whole but does represent the sum of the blocs that sustain it. And that sum, sooner or later, will present its bill.

The shadow of Weimar and the ghost of 1945

The historical comparison comes up again and again. People speak of a second Weimar Republic, of a cycle repeating itself, and of how in a few years the scene could return with cap, epaulettes and buckle. The reference to 1945 also hangs in the air: some hold that Germany died that day and that what remains is a corpse that refuses to recognize itself.

It is not a new diagnosis. What is new is that it is being applied to a sitting government, not to a distant past.

The voter left without representation

The most repeated argument is not against the left, it is against the right. The criticism is aimed at the CDU and its leadership for having accepted the pogre framework as the playing field. Merkel's successor is portrayed with disdain: he is credited with having adopted the adversary's theses so as not to lose the center.

Hence the bitter conclusion: the conservative voter has no one to vote for, and on top of that is expected to enjoy what others voted for.

What happens when this blows up

The most widely shared prediction is not electoral, it is physical. When a structure is forced too far in the wrong direction, it eventually gives way and snaps back into place. The question is not whether it will happen, but when. And there the analysis stalls: some say years, others decades, and no one will sign a calendar.

Meanwhile, the practical advice circulating among the most pessimistic is simple: leave Western Europe before 2030. It is a stock phrase, but it describes a state of mind.